• Home
  • Browse
    • Current Issue
    • By Issue
    • By Author
    • By Subject
    • Author Index
    • Keyword Index
  • Journal Info
    • About Journal
    • Aims and Scope
    • Editorial Board
    • Publication Ethics
    • Peer Review Process
  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Contact Us
 
  • Login
  • Register
Home Articles List Article Information
  • Save Records
  • |
  • Printable Version
  • |
  • Recommend
  • |
  • How to cite Export to
    RIS EndNote BibTeX APA MLA Harvard Vancouver
  • |
  • Share Share
    CiteULike Mendeley Facebook Google LinkedIn Twitter
Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches
arrow Articles in Press
arrow Current Issue
Journal Archive
Volume Volume 30 (2025)
Volume Volume 29 (2024)
Volume Volume 28 (2023)
Volume Volume 27 (2022)
Volume Volume 26 (2021)
Volume Volume 25 (2020)
Volume Volume 24 (2019)
Volume Volume 23 (2018)
Volume Volume 22 (2017)
Volume Volume 21 (2016)
Issue Issue 4
Issue Issue 3
Issue Issue 2
Issue Issue 1
Volume Volume 20 (2015)
Volume Volume 19 (2014)
Gomaa, M., Radwan, F., Fathallah Rehab, I., Kandil, E., AbdElRazek, M. (2016). Effect of Organic Amendments, Nitrogenous Fertilization and Spray of Micronutrients on Barley. Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches, 21(4), 596-608. doi: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.180445
Mahmoud Gomaa; Fathy Radwan; Ibrahim Fathallah Rehab; Essam Esmael Kandil; Mansour AbdElRazek. "Effect of Organic Amendments, Nitrogenous Fertilization and Spray of Micronutrients on Barley". Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches, 21, 4, 2016, 596-608. doi: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.180445
Gomaa, M., Radwan, F., Fathallah Rehab, I., Kandil, E., AbdElRazek, M. (2016). 'Effect of Organic Amendments, Nitrogenous Fertilization and Spray of Micronutrients on Barley', Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches, 21(4), pp. 596-608. doi: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.180445
Gomaa, M., Radwan, F., Fathallah Rehab, I., Kandil, E., AbdElRazek, M. Effect of Organic Amendments, Nitrogenous Fertilization and Spray of Micronutrients on Barley. Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches, 2016; 21(4): 596-608. doi: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.180445

Effect of Organic Amendments, Nitrogenous Fertilization and Spray of Micronutrients on Barley

Article 6, Volume 21, Issue 4 - Serial Number 81, December 2016, Page 596-608  XML PDF (169.01 K)
Document Type: Research papers
DOI: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.180445
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Mahmoud Gomaa1; Fathy Radwan1; Ibrahim Fathallah Rehab2; Essam Esmael Kandil1; Mansour AbdElRazek1
1Plant Production Department, Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria University
2Faculty of Agriculture saba basha, Alexandria University
Abstract
This investigation aimed to increase barley grain yield. In this respect, two field experiments were carried out at the Experimental Farm, Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt, in a split- split plot design with three replications during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 growing seasons. Main plot treatments were sulphur rates (0, 200 and 400 kg/ha), however nitrogen fertilizer sources (urea, nitrate ammonium and ammonium sulphate) were allocated in sub-plots and biofertilizers inoculation (control, mycorrhizae and phosphorein inoculation) were distributed in sub- sub plots. The obtained results indicated that increasing sulphur application up to 400 kg/ha., significantly increased all studied yield, yield components and grain composition traits, i.e. number and weight of spikes/m2, number of spikelets and grains/spike, 1000-kernel weight, biological, straw and grain yield/ha, harvest index, grain protein, nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium content in the two studied seasons. Also, ammonium sulphate (as nitrogen source) produced the highest values of the previous trait. However, inoculated barley grains with phosphorein biofertilizers showed the highest of the studied traits except phosphorus grains content in the two seasons, where inoculation with mycorrhizae showed the highest grains phosphorus content (0.273 and 0.287%) in the two successive seasons. Sulphur application at 400 kg/ha., combined with ammonium sulphate or phosphorein inoculation interaction produced the highest values of all studied traits, except P and K contents in grains, meanwhile 400 kg S/ha application combined with mycorrhizal inoculation had the highest P and K content in two seasons. Ammonium sulphate X phosphorein inoculation interaction had the same trend in the two seasons. Regarding the three factors of interaction effects, sowing inoculated grains with phosphorein under 400 kg S/ha and ammonium sulphate application produced the highest values of the studied traits, except P and K grains content in both seasons. Conversely, any of two and three factors of interaction did not reach significant level effect on 1000- grains weight in the two seasons.
Keywords
Sulphur rate; Nitrogen sources; Biofertilizers; Barley; Yield; attributes; Grain quality
Main Subjects
Crops and quality
Full Text

INTRODUCTION

 

Barley (Hordeum vulgare, L.) is grown as a commercial crop in one hundred countries around the world and it assumes the fourth rank in total cereal production in the world after wheat, rice and maize (FAO, 2004). Barley is considered as one of the most important cereal crops in Egypt. It is the major food source in many North African countries, because it tolerates the adverse environments compared to other cereal crops (Hayes et al., 2003). Nitrogen is the most important factor affecting crop morphology (Amanullah et al., 2008), increased grains yield with increasing nitrogen level (Singh and Uttam, 2000).

 

Plant growth is enhanced through conversion of nutritionally important elements as nitrogen and phosphorus by biological processes as nitrogen fixation and solubilization of rock phosphate (Mohammadi and Sohrabi, 2012).

 

Sulphur is considered as soil amendment. Oxidation of sulphur to H2SO4 is beneficial in alkaline soil to reduce pH, supply SO-4 to plants, makes phosphorus and micronutrients more available in reclaim soils (Lindemann et al.,1991). Ghani et al. (1997) reported that microbial population in soil is not a limiting factor in elemental sulphur oxidation. Now days, biofertilizers inoculation is considered to limit the use of mineral fertilizers and supports an effective tool for desert development under less polluted environment, decreasing production costs, maximizing crop yield due to providing them with an available nutritive clement (Metin et al., 2012). Soil micro- organisms bind soil particles into stable aggregates, which improve soil structure and reduce erosion potential (Shetty et al., 1994).

 

Biofertilizer can be used as fertilizer or as soil amendment, depending on its effect on the plant nutrition.Hence, a fertilizer is a source of quickly available nutrients that have a direct and short-term effect on plant growth, while a soil amendment can influence plant growth indirectly by improving the physical and biological properties of the soil (Angelova et al., 2013).

 

A- Mycorrihzal fungi have been shown to promote plant growth and salinity tolerance by many researchers. They promote salinity tolerance by utilizing various mechanisms, such as enhancing nutrient uptake, producing plant growth hormones, improving rhizospheric and soil conditions, improvement in photosynthetic activity or water use efficiency, accumulation of compatible solutes, and production of higher antioxidant enzymes. As a result, AM fungi are considered suitable for bioamelioration of saline soils (Asghari et al. 2005, Hajiboland et al., 2010, Manchanda and Garg 2011, and Evelin et al., 2012 and 2013).

 

The present investigation was carried out to study the effect of sulphur application rates, nitrogen sources and biofertilizers inoculation on growth, grains yield and its components of barley crop.

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 

Two filed experiments were carried out at the Experimental Farm, Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt, during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 growing seasons to study effect of sulphur application rates, nitrogen fertilizer sources and biofertilizers inoculation on growth, grain yield and components, besides grain chemical contents of six- rows barley cv. Giza 123. A split- split plot design with three replicates were used in both seasons. Three sulphur application rates (0, 200 and 400 kg/ha) were randomly assigned in the main plots, three nitrogen sources, i.e. urea (46% N), ammonium nitrate (33.5% N) and ammonium sulphate (20.6% N) were allocated in sub-plots and three biofertilizers treatments (uninoculation, mycorrhizae and phosphorein at 400 g/ha.) were randomly distributed in sub-sub plots. Barley was sown on 4th and 8th December in two growing seasons, respectively, after maize planting. Seeding rate was (70 kg/ha.) and plot size was 10.5 m2 (1/400 fed.) with 3.5 m length and 3 m width. Sulphur applied during seed bed preparation, nitrogen fertilizer at 144 kg/ha., were applied in two equal doses before the first and second irrigations.

Phosphorene (Bacillus megtherium phosphbacterium) was performed by coating barely grains with each product individually using a sticking substance (Arabic gum 5%) just before sowing. A- mycorrhizal fungi (Glomus macrocaripum) was obtained from Plant Production Department, Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria Uinversity at the rate of 250 spores was mixed with grain. Recommended cultural practices for barley production were conducted Soil physical and analyses were carried out in the two growing seasons and showed in Table (1).

 

Table (1). Physical and chemical properties of experimental soil in 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons.

 

Soil properties

 

2013/2014

2014/2015

A- Mechanical analysis

Clay %

Sand %

Silt

Soil texture

 

37

33

30

Clay loam

 

36

34

30

Clay loam

B- Chemical properties

pH (1:1)

EC (1:1) dS/m

1- Soluble cations (1:2)

K+

Ca++

Mg++

Na++

 

8.30

3.70

 

1.45

8.7

18.5

13.8

 

8.41

3.65

 

1.58

8.3

18.6

13.8

2- Soluble anions (1:2)

CO-3+ HCO-3

CL-

SO-4

 

2.80

19.80

12.60

 

2.60

18.80

12.70

Calcium carbonate %

7.00

7.30

Total nitrogen %

0.91

0.81

Available Phosphorus (mg/kg)

3.55

3.41

Organic matter (%)

1.41

1.40

 

At harvest, one square meter was randomly taken in each sub- sub plot to determine number of spikes/m2, ten random spikes were chosen in each sub-sub plot to calculate number of grains/spike and thousand kernel weight (g) was determined as an average of three samples.  Biological and grain yield by harvesting all plants in each sub-sub and converted to tons/ha., harvest index besids protein N, P and K grain content were determined.

 

Protein percentage was determined by estimating the total nitrogen in the grains and multiplied by 6.25 to obtain the protein percentage according to grains protein percentage to AOAC (1990). NPK percentages were determined in the dry grains. Their dry weights were determined following drying in a drying chamber to a constant weight at 75oC for 72 hour according to Tandon (1995). After dryness, the plant samples were milled and stored for analysis as reported. However, 0.5g of the grains powder was wet-digested with H2SO4–H2O2 mixture according to (Lowther, 1980) and the following determinations were carried out in the digested solution to determine NPK. Total nitrogen was determined in digested plant material colorimetrically by Nessler`s method (Chapman andPratt, 1978). Phosphorus was determined by the Vanadomolyate yellow method as given by Jackson (1973) and the intensity of colour developed was read in spectrophotometer at 405nm. Potassium was determined according to the method described by method Jackson (1973) using Beckman Flame photometer.

 

Collected data were statistically analyzed using Co stat (2005) statiscal program, and treatment mean were compared using the least significand differences method (L.S.D) at 5% probability level as described by Gomez and Gomez (1984). 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

 

A-   Yield and yield attributes:

Data presented in Table (2) showed that studied yield components, i.e. spikes number and weight/m2, number of spikelets and grains/spike and 1000- grain weight were, significantly, affected by sulphur application levels, nitrogen fertilizer sources and biofertilizer inoculation in the two studied seasons.

 

Increasing sulphur application from zero to 400 kg/ha., significantly increased the previous traits by 23.11% for number of spikes/m2, 26.66 % for spikes weight/m2, 17.90% for number of spikelets/spike, 14.48% for number of grains/spike and 7.21% for 1000- kernel weight as an average of the seasons, respectively. These increases in the studied yield components in barley crop might be reffered to the favorable effect of sulphur for decreeing soil pH and increasing phosphorus and micronutrients availability to plant (Lindemenn et al., 1991). 

 

Results also, demonstrated that nitrogen application as ammonium sulphate produced the highest number of spikes/m2 (394.14 and 388.96), heaviest spikes weight/m2 (279.19 and 269.50g), highest number of spikelets/spike (51.74 and 52.51), highest number of grains/spike (38.66 and 39.70) and heaviest 1000- grain weight (46.46 and 49.55g) in the first and second growing seasons, respectively.

 

Concerning biofertilization treatments, results in Table (2) revealed that inoculated barley grains with mycorrhizae or phosphorein significantly increased all the studied yield attributes in the two seasons compared to uninoculated grains.

 

Barley grains inoculated with phosphorein biofertilizer showed the highest number of spikes/m2 (402.20), spikes weight/m2 (284.82g), number of spikelets/spike (52.96), number of grains/spikes (40.24) and 1000- grains weight (48.12g) as an average of the two seasons. These increase could be due to the stimulation effect of micro- organisms that produce plant pgytohormons as IAA, Gas and SKs, which promote plant growth cell division, hence encouraging photosynthesis and assimilates accumulation (El- Khawas, 1990 and Hussein and Radwan 2001).

 

Concerning sulphur appliacation levels X N sources interaction effect, results in Table (3) showed that applied 400 kg S/ha to barley fertilized by ammonium sulphate shoed the highest number of spikes/m2 (418.66) in the second season, weight of spikes/m2 (335.17 and 300.77g), number of spikelets/spike (57.88 and 58.66) and number of grains/spike (42.0 and 43.44) in the first and second seasons, respectively.

 

Results presented in Table (3) indicated that biological, straw and grain yield besides harvest index were significantly affected with the three studied factors, where applied 400 kg S/ha produced the highest biological yield (18.03 and 17.87 ton/ha) straw yield (11.03 and 10.83 ton/ha), grain yield (6.97 and 7.03 ton/ha) and harvest index (38.51 and 39.19%) in the first and second seasons, respectively.

 

Data in Table (3) also, revealed that using ammonium sulphate as nitrogen source gave the highest values(17.24 and 16.99 ton/ha), (10.30 and 9.98 ton/ha), (6.99 and 6.78ton/ha) and (40.11 and 39.70%) for the respective traits in the two seasons, respectively. Also, inoculated barley grains with phosphorein showed the highest values (17.46 and 17.19 ton/ha), (10.61 and 10.52 ton/ha), (6.84 and 6.66 ton/ha) and (38.93 and 38.44%) for the previous characters in the two successive seasons.

 

On the other side, applied 400 kg S/ha combined with ammonium sulphate fertilization showed the highest biological, straw and grain yields besides H.I in the two seasons Table (4). However, sulphur application at 400 kg/ha inoculated grains with phosphorein produced the highest straw yield (12.02 ton/ha) in the first season, biological yield (19.99 and 19.77 ton/ha), grain yield (7.96 and 8.05 ton/ha) and H.I. (39.66 and 40.66%) in the first and second seasons, respectively. as reported in Table (5).

 

With respect to nitrogen sources X biofertilizers inoculation effect, results presented in Table (10) indicated that phosphorein inoculation combined with fertilization with ammonium sulphate produced that highest straw yield (10.81 ton/ha) in the first season, biological yield (18.72 and 18.78 ton/ha), grain yield (7.90 and 7.92 ton/ha) and harvest index (42.21 and 42.18%) in the two successive seasons, respectively..

 

Regarding three factors interaction effect, results presented in Table (7) showed that the highest straw yield in the first season (12.68 ton/ha), biological yield (21.77 and 21.78 ton/ha), grain yield (9.09 and 9.16 ton/ha) and HI (41.53 and 42.05%) in the first and second seasons, respectively. resulted from using 400 kg S/ha, ammonium sulphate as N source application to inoculated barley grains with phosphorein.

 


Table (2). Effect of sulphur application level, nitrogen fertilizer source and biofertilizers on barley yield components during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons.

 

Treatment

No. of number spikes/m2

Spikes weight/m2

No. of spikelets/spike

No. of grains/spike

1000- grain weight

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

A) Sulphur rate  (kg/ha)

0

325.44c

332.48c

233.35c

238.62c

45.40c

45.81c

34.21c

35.88c

43.76c

46.66c

200

385.74b

392.29b

253.23b

252.84b

49.18b

49.14b

37.26

37.24b

45.57b

48.62b

400

410.59a

399.18a

303.96a

293.63a

52.29a

54.25a

39.66a

40.55a

46.87a

50.7a

L.S.D.at 0.05

7.07

4.56

3.78

2.35

0.29

0.55

0.56

0.46

0.82

1.22

B) N Sources

Urea

358.48c

364.11c

249.32c

251.42c

47.11c

47.29c

35.10c

36.10c

44.51c

47.34c

Nitrate

369.14b

370.88a

262.03b

264.18b

49.03b

49.40b

49.03b

37.88b

45.23b

48.46b

Sulphate

394.14a

288.96a

279.19a

269.50a

51.74a

52.51a

38.66a

39.70a

46.46a

49.55a

L.S.D.at 0.05

2.08

2.66

1.26

1.60

1.03

0.55

0.51

0.46

0.70

0.61

C) Biofertilizer

Control

343.44c

348.66c

242.75c

244.78c

45.92c

46.29c

34.81c

35.03c

44.25c

46.78c

Mycorrhizae

377.06b

372.14b

262.96b

255.51b

49.18a

49.85b

36.55b

37.95b

45.61b

48.68b

Phosphorein

401.25a

403.14a

284.83a

284.81a

52.85a

53.07a

39.77a

40.70a

46.35a

49.89a

L.S.D.at 0.05

2.79

2.71

1.40

1.98

0.79

0.60

0.83

0.31

0.61

0.76

Interactions

A×B

ns

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

ns

ns

A×C

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

ns

ns

B×C

*

*

*

*

ns

ns

*

*

ns

ns

A×B×C

*

*

*

*

ns

*

ns

*

ns

ns

Means at the same column followed by the same letter are statistically equaled according to L.S.D. at 0.05 value, ns: not significant and *: significant difference at 0.05 level of probability.

 

Table (3). Effect of sulphur application level, nitrogen fertilizer source and biofertilizers on barley yield during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons.

 

Treatment

Biological yield

(ton/ha)

Straw yield

(ton/ha)

Grain yield (ton/ha)

Harvest index (H.I%)

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

A) Sulphur level (kg/ha):

0

14.25c

14.35c

8.88c

9.07c

5.58c

5.28c

39.16a

36.79c

200

15.56b

15.26b

9.66b

9.63b

5.89b

5.71b

37.55b

37.30b

400

18.03a

17.87a

11.06a

10.83a

6.97a

7.03a

38.85a

39.34a

L.S.D. at 0.05

0.06

0.02

0.01

0.21

0.23

0.02

0.18

0.11

B) Nitrogen fertilizer Source:

Urea

14.61.c

14.97c

9.35c

9.48b

5.26c

5.49c

35.48c

36.53c

Nitrate

15.98b

15.51b

9.72b

9.76ab

6.26b

5.76b

37.57b

36.97b

Sulphate

17.24a

16.99a

10.30a

9.98a

6.94a

6.78a

40.26a

39.70a

L.S.D. at 0.05

0.06

0.02

0.02

0.39

0.20

0.02

0.20

0.11

C) Biofertilizer:

Control

14.40c

14.48c

9.18c

8.93c

5.44c

5.33c

36.11c

36.77c

Mycorrhizae

15.97b

15.80b

9.978b

9.76b

6.18b

6.03b

38.49b

37.99b

Phosphorein

17.46a

17.19a

10.61a

10.52a

6.48a

6.66a

38.93a

38.44a

L.S.D. at 0.05

0.09

0.02

0.01

0.37

0.18

0.01

0.22

0.07

Interaction:

A×B

*

*

*

ns

*

*

*

*

A×C

*

*

*

ns

*

*

*

*

B×C

*

*

*

ns

*

*

*

*

A×B×C

*

*

*

ns

*

*

*

*

Means at the same column followed by the same letter are statistically equaled according to L.S.D. at 0.05 value, ns: not significant and  *: significant difference at 0.05 level of probability.

 

 

 

Table (4). The interaction between sulphur application levels and nitrogen fertilizer sources for biological yield, straw yield, grain yield (ton/ha) and harvest index (%) during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons.

 

Sulphur

level

(kg/ha)

N-source

Biological yield

(ton/ha)

Straw yield

(ton/ha)

Grain yield (ton/ha)

Harvest index (%) (H.I.)

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

0

Urea

13.61

14.06

8.90

4.70

4.93

34.58

35.10

Nitrate

14.24

14.24

9.0

5.90

5.16

36.79

36.29

Sulphate

14.90

145.76

8.75

6.14

5.74

39.01

38.75

200

Urea

13.83

14.29

9.94

4.89

5.17

35.36

36.22

Nitrate

15.95

14.84

9.91

6.04

5.27

37.46

35.59

Sulphate

16.89

16.64

10.13

6.76

6.70

39.84

40.08

400

Urea

16.38

16.56

10.15

6.17

6.36

37.58

38.26

Nitrate

17.76

17.46

10.92

6.84

6.48

38.47

39.03

Sulphate

19.94

19.57

12.02

7.91

7.91

40.49

40.27

L.S.D. 0.05

0.10

0.03

0.03

0.35

0.35

0.35

0.19

 

Table (5). Effect of sulphur application level and biofertilizers on biological yield, straw yield, grain yield (ton/ha) and harvest index (%) during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons.

 

Sulphur

level

(kg/ha)

Bio-fertilizer

Biological yield

(ton/ha)

Straw yield

(ton/ha)

Grain yield (ton/ha)

Harvest index (H.I %)

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

0

Control

13.0

13.39

8.26

4.99

4.93

35.25

36.76

Mycorrhizae

14.30

14.16

8.85

5.45

5.12

37.87

36.17

Phosphorein

15.45

15.51

9.54

5.90

5.79

38.12

37.21

200

Control

14.10

14.15

9.10

5.40

5.19

36.40

36.72

Mycorrhizae

15.64

15.34

9.60

6.04

5.81

38.39

37.73

Phosphorein

16.64

16.29

10.28

6.65

6.15

39.02

37.45

400

Control

16.11

15.91

10.18

5.92

5.87

36.67

36.82

Mycorrhizae

17.98

17.91

10.88

7.05

7.18

39.20

40.07

Phosphorein

19.99

19.77

12.02

7.96

8.05

39.66

40.66

L.S.D. 0.05

0.08

0.03

0.02

0.32

0.02

0.39

0.12

 

Table (6). Interaction between nitrogen fertilizer sources and biofertilizers for biological yield, straw yield, grain yield (ton/ha.) and harvest index (%) during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons.

 

N Source

Bio-fertilizer

Biological yield

(ton/ha)

Straw yield

(ton/ha)

Grain yield

(ton/ha)

Harvest index

(H.I%)

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

Urea

Control

13.54

13.88

8.78

4.76

4.99

35.13

35.97

Mycorrhizae

14.47

14.92

9.16

5.26

5.60

36.22

37.37

Phosphorein

15.82

16.11

10.06

5.75

5.87

36.16

36.24

Nitrate

Control

14.25

14.30

9.16

5.75

2.25

35.45

36.76

Mycorrhizae

15.86

15.56

9.70

6.16

5.82

38.74

37.25

Phosphorein

17.85

16.67

10.87

6.87

6.20

38.43

36.90

Sulphate

Control

15.41

15.27

9.61

5.80

5.75

37.64

37.57

Mycorrhizae

17.59

16.93

10.48

7.11

6.68

40.49

39.35

Phosphorein

18.72

18.78

10.81

7.90

7.92

42.21

42.18

L.S.D. 0.05

0.08

0.03

0.02

0.32

0.02

0.39

0.12

 

 

 

Table (7). The interaction effect among sulphur application levels, nitrogen sources and biofertilizers inoculation for biological yield, straw yield, grain yield (ton/ha) and harvest index (%) during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons.

 

Sulphur rate

N-Source

Bio-fertilizer

Biological yield

(ton/ha)

Straw yield

(ton/ha)

Grain yield

(ton/ha)

Harvest index

(H.I %)

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

0

Urea

Control

12.68

13.21

8.22

4.71

4.78

34.56

34.55

Mycorrhizae

13.50

13.89

8.78

5.02

4.86

34.93

34.58

Phosphorein

14.67

14.95

9.64

6.72

5.17

34.26

37.57

Nitrate

Control

12.94

13.34

8.29

6.19

4.96

36.49

36.57

Mycorrhizae

14.04

14.21

8.85

5.81

5.19

36.99

35.76

Phosphorein

15.75

15.30

9.94

5.10

5.32

36.88

36.96

Sulphate

Control

13.38

13.63

8.27

6.45

5.04

38.14

36.98

Mycorrhizae

15.38

14.37

8.93

6.88

5.31

41.68

42.31

Phosphorein

15.94

16.28

9.05

4.68

6.89

43.22

36.81

200

Urea

Control

13.16

13.60

9.47

4.81

5.01

35.58

36.90

Mycorrhizae

13.62

14.10

8.81

5.18

5.20

35.32

34.96

Phosphorein

14.72

15.18

9.54

4.79

5.31

35.19

36.33

Nitrate

Control

14.05

13.75

9.26

6.26

5.07

33.62

35.25

Mycorrhizae

16.15

15.16

9.89

7.06

5.34

38.76

35.18

Phosphorein

17.65

15.40

10.59

5.51

5.42

40.0

37.01

Sulphate

Control

15.09

14.89

9.57

7.04

5.51

36.54

41.05

Mycorrhizae

17.14

16.75

10.09

7.72

6.88

41.09

42.20

Phosphorein

18.44

18.29

10.72

5.21

7.72

41.88

35.35

400

Urea

Control

14.79

14.71

9.57

6.26

5.20

35.26

40.25

Mycorrhizae

16.29

16.77

9.88

6.26

6.75

38.43

39.19

Phosphorein

18.07

18.21

10.99

7.06

7.14

39.05

36.93

Nitrate

Control

15.75

15.74

10.0

5.75

5.73

36.53

36.93

Mycorrhizae

17.40

17.33

10.35

7.04

6.92

40.47

39.95

Phosphorein

20.14

19.32

12.40

7.73

7.87

38.41

40.76

Sulphate

Control

17.78

17.30

10.98

6.80

6.70

38.24

38.74

Mycorrhizae

21.77

19.65

12.42

7.85

7.86

38.71

40.02

Phosphorein

21.77

21.78

12.68

9.09

9.16

41.53

42.05

L.S.D. 0.05

0.13

0.05

0.04

0.55

0.04

0.67

0.21

 

B- Chemical composition of grains:

Data in Table (8) illustrated the three studied factors effect on crude protein, nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium content of grain in the two seasons. Increasing sulphur application up to 400 kg/ha produced the highest protein (9.03 and 7.27 %), nitrogen (1.44 and 1.163 %), phosphorus (0.273 and 0.299 %) and potassium (0.550 and 0.616 %) content in the first and second seasons, respectively.

 

Also, barely fertilized with ammonium sulphate produced the highest mean values of the studied traits (9.27 and 7.23 %) for protein (1.485 and 1.157 %) phosphorus, (0.266 and 0.285 %) and potassium (0.550 and 0.616 %) content in the two successive seasons, respectively.

 

Inoculation with phosphorein gave the highest protein content (9.14 and 7.27 %) nitrogen (1.433 and 1.163 %) and potassium (0.540 and 0.619 %) in the first and second seasons, respectively. However, mycorrhizae inoculation produced the highest phosphorus content (0.273 and 0.287 %) in the first and second seasons, respectively.

 

Concerning the three factors of interaction, results presented in Table (8) revealed that there were significant interactions among the traits under this study.

 

The previous results pointed out that interaction among the three studied factors had significant interaction for the yield, yield components and grain chemical composition.   

 

Plant responses are deeply affected by the proportion of mineral N sources (Andrews et al., 2013). While NH+4 as sole nutrient can induce toxicity symptoms, its co-provision with NO3− generally promotes a synergistic effect leading to growth enhancement (Britto andKronzucker, 2002). It is noteworthy that NH+4  tolerance was related to high root N metabolism sus- tained by high GS activities (Cruz et al., 2006), which in maize appear to be associated with the capacity to cope with the C skeleton demands (Schortemeyer et al., 1997).

 

Table (8). Effect of sulphur application level, nitrogen fertilizer source and biofertilizers on protein in grains %, N, P and K percentage during 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 seasons.

 

Treatment

Protein %

N %

P %

K %

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2014/15

2013/14

2013/14

A) Sulphur level (kg/ha):

 

0

 

7.23c

6.92c

1.157c

1.108c

0.246c

0.255c

0.455c

0.463c

200

 

8.44b

7.20b

1.352b

1.153b

0.258b

0.268b

0.537b

0.268b

400

 

9.03a

7.27a

1.448a

1.163a

0.273a

0.299a

0.599a

0.697a

L.S.D. at 0.05

 

0.09

0.02

0.012

0.004

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

B) Nitrogen fertilizer source:

 

Urea

 

7.18c

6.99c

1.148c

1.118c

0.251c

0.261c

0.512c

0.567c

Nitrate

 

8.26b

7.18b

1.324b

1.148b

0.259b

0.276b

0.529b

0.277b

Sulphate

 

9.27a

7.23a

1.485a

1.157a

0.266a

0.285a

0.550a

0.616a

L.S.D. at 0.05

 

0.08

0.01

0.014

0.002

0.001

0.002

0.001

0.002

C) Biofertilizer:

 

Control

 

7.29c

6.97c

1.166c

1.115

0.250c

0.256c

0.503c

0.553c

Mycorrhizae

 

8.28b

7.16

1.358b

1.147

0.273a

0.287a

0.509

0.604b

Phosphorein

 

9.14a

7.27a

1.433a

1.163a

0.264b

0.278b

0.540a

0.619a

L.S.D. at 0.05

 

0.06

0.01

0.011

0.002

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

Interaction

 

A×B

 

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

A×C

 

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

B×C

 

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

A×B×C

 

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

                     

Means at the same column followed by the same letter are statistically equaled according to L.S.D. at 0.05 value., ns : not significant and  *: significant difference at 0.05 level of probability.

 

Conclusion

 

In conclusion, applying 400 kg S/fed., and ammonium sulphate as nitrogen fertilizer source to inoculated barley grains of Giza 123 cultivar with phosphorein produced the highest grains yield, yield attributes and grains quality studied traits under Alexandria Governorate conditions.

 

References
A.O.A.C. (1990). Official Methods of Analysis of Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 12th edition. Washington, D.C.

Amanullah, R. A. Khattak and S. K. Khalil (2008). Effects of plant density and N on phenology and yield of cereal. Plant. Nut. J., 32: 246-260.

Andrews M, J.A. Raven, and P. J. Lea (2013). Do plants need nitrate? The mechanism by which nitrogen form affects plants. Ann. Appl. Biol.;163:174–99.

Angelova, V. R., V. I. Akova, N. S. Artinova and K. I. Ivanov (2013). The effect of organic amendments on soil chemical characteristics. Bulg. J. Agric. Sci., 19(5):958-971.

Asghari, H.R., D. J. Chittleborough, F. A. Smith and S. E. Smith (2005). Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) symbiosis on phosphorus leaching through soil cores. Plant and Soil 275:181–193.

Britto, D. T. and H. J. Kronzucker (2002). NH4+toxicity in higher plants: a critical review.J. Plant Physiol.;159:567–84.

Chapman, H. D. and P.F. Pratt (1978).  Method of Analysis for Soil and Water. 2nd Ed., Chapter, 17pp 150-161. Uni. Calif. Div. Agric. Sci. USA.

CoStat, 6.311, copyright (c) (2005). Cohort software798 light house Ave. PMB320, Monterey, CA93940 and USA. Email: info@cohort.com and Website: http://www.cohort.com/DownloadCoStatPart2.html.

Cruz, C., A. F. M. Bio, M. D. Domínguez-Valdivia, P. M. Aparicio-Tejo, C. Lamsfus, M. A. Martins-Loução (2006). How does glutamine synthetase activity determine plant tolerance to ammonium? Planta.;223:1068–80.

El- Khawas, H. (1990). Ecological, physiological and genetic, studies of Azospirillum. Ph.D. Desertation, Bayreuth Univ., Germany.

Evelin, H., B. Giri and R. Kapoor (2012). Contribution of Glomusintraradices inoculation to nutrient acquisition and mitigat ion of ionic imbalance in NaCl-stressed Trigonella foenum-graecum. Mycorrhiza, 22:203–217.

Evelin, H., B. Giri and R. Kapoor (2013). Ultrastructural evidence for AMF mediated salt stress mitigation in Trigonella  foenum-gr aecum. Mycorrhiza 23:71–86.

FAO. (2004). http://apps.fao.org/faostat/default.Jsp,accessed February 2004.

Ghani, A., J. M. Watkinson and M. P. Upsdet (1997). Modling the oxidation of elemental sulphur in New Zealand pastorial soil. Sulphur in Agric., 20: 3-9.

Gomez, W. K. and A. A. Gomez (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. Second Edition. An international Rice- Institute Book- John Wiley and Sons., New York, USA.

Hajiboland, R., N. Aliasgharzadeh, S. F. Laiegh and C. Poschenreider (2010). Colonization with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi improves salinity tolerance of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plants. Plant Soil, 331:313–327.

Hayes, P. M., A. Castro, L. M. Cedillo, A. Corey, C. Henson, B. L. Jones, J. Kling, D. Matus, I. Rossi and K. Sato (2003). Genetic diversity for quantitatively inherited agronomic and malting quality traits. Elsevier science publishers, Amsterdam.

Hussein, B. F. and S. M. A. Radwan (2001). Effect of biofertilization with different levels of nitrogen and phosphorus on wheat and associated weeds under weed control treatments. Pak. J. Biological Sci., 4 (4): 435- 441.

Jackson, M.L. (1973). Soil chemical analysis, Prentice Hall of India private limited, New Delhi, P. 498.

Lindemann, W.C., J. J. Aburto, W. M. Haffner and A. A. Bono (1991). Effect of sulphur source on sulphur oxidation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 55: 85-90.

Lowther, G.R. (1980). Using of a single H2So4 - H2O2 digest for the analysis of Pinus radiate needles. Commun.Soil Sci. pl.Analysis, 11: 175-188

Manchanda, G. and N. Garg (2011). Alleviation of salt-induced ionic, osmotic and oxidative stresses in Cajanuscajan nodules by AM inoculation. Plant Biosyst. 145:88–97

Metin,T., R. Gulluce, C. A. makci, T. Oztas and F. Sahin (2012). The effect of PGPR strain on wheat yield and quality parameters. 19th world congress of soil Sci., Soil solution for a chaning world, 1-6 August, 2010, Brisbane, Aust.

Mohammadi, K. and Y. Sohrabi (2012). Bacterial biofertilizers for sustainable crop production: a review. J. Agric. and Biol. Sci., 7(5):307-316.

Schortemeyer, M, P. Stamp, and B. Feil (1997). Ammonium tolerance and carbohydrate status in maize cultivars. Ann. Bot.,79:25–30

Shetty, K. G., B. A. D. Hetrick, D. A. H. Figge and A. P. Schwab (1994). Effects of mycorrhizae and other soil microbes on revegetation of heavy metal contaminated mine soil. Environ. Pollut., 86: 181-188.

Singh, V. P. and S. K. Uttam (2000). Effect of farmyard manure and nitrogen levels on crop yield and economics of rice – wheat cropping system. Crop Res., 5: 82- 86.

Tandon, H. (1995). Methods of Analysis of soil, plants, waters and ferilizer, p: 144. Fertilizers development and consultation organization, New Delhi, India.

Statistics
Article View: 166
PDF Download: 308
Home | Glossary | News | Aims and Scope | Sitemap
Top Top

Journal Management System. Designed by NotionWave.